move_file

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It only states 'Move or rename a file' without mentioning important aspects such as overwrite behavior, permission requirements, reversibility, or the role of the 'confirm' parameter. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. Every word is necessary and there is no fluff. It is an example of efficient writing that conveys the core purpose immediately.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although there is an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description fails to explain critical behavioral context such as what happens when the destination exists, whether the source is deleted, or how the 'confirm' parameter works. For a file mutation tool, this leaves important gaps in the agent's understanding. The description is too minimal to be fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (src, dst, confirm) have basic descriptions. The tool description itself adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but since the schema already provides adequate parameter info, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (move or rename) and the resource (a file) with the scope 'within the workspace'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like copy_file and delete_file by specifying the move/rename operation, making the tool's purpose immediately obvious.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides context by limiting operations to 'within the workspace', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like copy_file or delete_file. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given, so the usage guidance is only implicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.